Skip to main content
Normal View

Freedom of Information.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 18 February 2004

Wednesday, 18 February 2004

Questions (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

Enda Kenny

Question:

1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests which were processed by his Department during 2003; the number which have been acceded to; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1009/04]

View answer

Enda Kenny

Question:

2 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1042/04]

View answer

Enda Kenny

Question:

3 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by this Department during December 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1045/04]

View answer

Trevor Sargent

Question:

4 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department in 2003; the number acceded to by his Department; how these figures compare with comparable figures in 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1273/04]

View answer

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Question:

5 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November and December 2003. [1575/04]

View answer

Pat Rabbitte

Question:

6 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November 2003 and December 2003; the way in which these figures compare with the equivalent figures for the corresponding months in 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2895/04]

View answer

Joe Higgins

Question:

7 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the number of freedom of information requests received by his Department during November and December 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3696/04]

View answer

Oral answers (23 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, together.

The information sought by the Deputies in regard to freedom of information requests relevant to my Department is contained in the following tables.

Comparisons between the yearly number of applications show an increase between 1999, with 207 requests, and 2001, with 276 requests. The trend was downward after that with 146 requests in 2002 and 142 requests last year.

A comparison between the last two months of 2003 and of 2002 shows a decrease from 33 to nine. All requests received in my Department are processed in accordance with both the 1997 Act and the 2003 Act, and their implementation is kept under constant review.

Freedom of Information Requests 2002

Received

Granted

Part Granted

Refused

No records

Transferred

Withdrawn

Jan

20

8

4

0

4

2

2

Feb

12

4

2

0

2

0

4

March

14

6

5

0

2

0

1

April

10

4

3

0

1

2

0

May

10

2

3

2

2

0

1

June

9

1

1

2

4

1

0

July

10

1

1

2

2

2

2

Aug

8

2

3

1

1

0

1

Sept

7

0

4

0

3

0

0

Oct

13

5

2

2

2

2

2

Nov

15

6

4

1

2

0

5

Dec

18

10

3

0

0

0

0

Total

146

49

35

10

25

9

18

Freedom of Information Requests 2003

Received

Granted

Part Granted

Refused

No records

Transferred

Withdrawn

Jan

21

2

7

4

4

2

2

Feb

29

9

11

2

5

1

1

March

30

10

9

3

6

0

2

April

10

4

2

0

3

0

1

May

11

1

4

0

6

0

0

June

7

2

2

0

2

0

1

July

13

2

5

0

4

1

1

Aug

6

3

1

0

1

1

0

Sept

4

2

2

0

0

0

0

Oct

2

0

1

0

0

0

1

Nov

6

3

1

1

1

0

0

Dec

3

0

1

1

1

0

0

Total

142

38

46

11

33

5

9

Will the Taoiseach comment on remarks made recently by the Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, to the effect that the Lansdowne Road decision resulted, in part, from information derived under the Freedom of Information Act? She appeared to say that the extent——

Sorry, Deputy, as the Chair has pointed out for many years, these questions refer specifically to freedom of information requests processed by the Taoiseach's Department. The Freedom of Information Act is a matter for the Minister for Finance.

When we were looking for statistics on the second half of 2003 on the fall-off in freedom of information requests, we were able to find statistics from almost every Department but not the Department of the Taoiseach. Can the Taoiseach indicate if the trend is borne out in his Department? We have seen the number of requests falling in the period July-December 2003 compared to the same period in the previous year. Requests are down by 70% in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and 60% in the Department of Health and Children. In the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism——

Again, as I pointed out to Deputy Kenny——

I am trying to elicit information from the Taoiseach's Department. Is this trend borne out in his Department as in other Departments? Requests in the Departments of Arts, Sport and Tourism, and Foreign Affairs have decreased by 70%, and by 60% in the Department of Finance. Is there a similar decrease in the Department of the Taoiseach and is this directly related to the increased charges put on ordinary people seeking information to which they are entitled?

I looked at the figures for my Department over the weekend. In the first year or 18 months after the Act was introduced, my Department received an enormous number of requests, many of which went back over many years when such a facility was not available. Information sought by individuals in a personal capacity generated many such requests. This substantially died down after the initial period and has continued to do so.

There have been a number of changes. In the early days, staff requests for information went through the FOI system. They no longer have to do this as their files are available to them without going through the FOI system. Many requests were from staff in the Department wishing to see what their superiors or anyone else was saying about them. They can now get their files which has led to a reduction in the baseline number. Those seeking personal files do not have to pay a fee or an appeal fee and the people concerned are not affected.

Does this refer to people seeking personal information?

Yes, it refers to any kind of personal facts.

There have been changes since the fee was introduced. The intention always was that a fee would be introduced. However, this was left out in the early part of the operation of the Act to allow the system to settle down. In the figures for my Department, the category of business requests has dropped from six to two, Oireachtas requests have dropped from two to one, and other requests have dropped from 23 to 21. The only really significant drop has been in requests from journalists.

Does the Taoiseach accept that there is a direct relationship between the fee charging regime introduced by the Government and the decline in the number of applications made under the Act? Does he accept that the effect of this is to impede public debate on matters of public interest? Does he accept the example given by the Information Commissioner regarding a project that started life in his Department, namely, the Abbotstown stadium?

I have already ruled Deputy Kenny out of order on this. This question refers specifically to the Department of the Taoiseach.

As did the Abbotstown stadium at the time. The view of the Information Commissioner is that the decision to locate at Lansdowne Road is at least partly due to the information secured under the Freedom of Information Act. Does the Taoiseach accept this? Does he accept that there are potentially several other projects and matters of public interest where applications will not be pursued under the Freedom of Information Act because of the fee-charging regime introduced by the Government?

I would not accept this. On a major project, or even a small project, a fee of €15 will hardly deter anyone from looking into any matter seriously.

Will the Chair explain why he changed precedent in the order of taking the questions as they appear on the Order Paper? I have no difficulty with Deputy Rabbitte speaking before me. I am more concerned about the Ceann Comhairle.

The Chair apologises to the Deputy; the Chair should have called you in advance of Deputy Rabbitte.

My comment was for the Chair and not Deputy Rabbitte.

The Information Commissioner, Emily O'Reilly, has recently highlighted the international experience where increases in fees or the introduction of fees for FOI requests have led to a direct effect on the number of requests proffered. Does the Taoiseach accept the veracity in the Information Commissioner's opinion that the drop in the number of requests to the Department of the Taoiseach and other Departments is as a direct result of the fees now applying? This is another example of access to information becoming more the preserve of those who can afford to pay for it rather than those who cannot afford it. Does the Taoiseach agree that it is a mistake to apply or increase fees and that access to information is a basic and fundamental right that should be restored? What is the Taoiseach's opinion on this?

The question is more appropriate to the Minister for Finance.

I am dealing with the Department of the Taoiseach.

No, you are not.

Is there a direct correlation between the drop in the number of requests for information to the Department of the Taoiseach and the fees now applying? Furthermore, in previous responses in the House, the Taoiseach indicated the introduction of the fee was a response to what he described as nuisance requests. We must recognise that built within the legislation is provision to safeguard the system from what are described in the legislation as "frivolous or vexatious" requests.

That is a question for the Minister for Finance.

I am particularly interested in the Department of the Taoiseach.

I will answer this in the context of my Department's experience. I do not accept the argument Deputy Ó Caoláin is making. If one wants personal files or data from my Department, one does not pay a fee. If one wants to trawl general issues — which a small minority of people did — the Department incurs a cost. I was involved in discussions on this issue some time ago but I will not go into that. It was decided that there should be a fee structure for FOI requests. I believe it was overdue and a better balance needed to be struck between the burden and the costs of administering the FOI Act. In many cases within my Department, this administration is quite costly and significant. While allowing people to have access to information is a right, there must be a sensible and balanced system of charges.

The charge of €15 to find something of a serious nature has discouraged people from making frivolous and vexatious inquiries to my Department. People making such requests have done what anyone will do when they have to pay for it and rather than submitting ten requests, they streamline them into a single request. They still get the information and I cannot see how a €15 fee would put off anybody. We looked at the appeals systems in Australia and New Zealand and we also followed their fee structures.

There were arguments about the deliberative process in my Department and that the Secretary General would be needed under sections 19 and 20. This regime has been in place for a year and we have not had a single case of this. I do not think the arguments are sustained.

Top
Share